from the plug-it-in dept

There's no escaping it: our wireless age still requires plenty of wires. Cables for your devices are a dime a dozen these days, but that doesn't mean there isn't occasionally an interesting innovation or an awesome new offering — and that's what we're featuring this week.

The picture kind of says it all, doesn't it? The Connex is a clever, convenient idea that appeals to all of us with a drawer full of semi-tangled charging cables of varying lengths, qualities and conditions (so, all of us, right?) It's an ultra-flexible silicon charging cable which, in its folded state, is about the size of a credit card, but which stretches out into an 18" cable then snaps right back when you're done. It's available in both Lightning and Micro USB connectors, and as a fun little bonus it's designed to be easily decorated with pens and markers — dress it up with an image in its flat form, and watch it become a twisty artistic mess when extended.

Though the Connex is designed to be strong and durable despite all the stretching and bending, it's still unlikely to outlast an IronWire — a braided metal charging cable that can famously tow a car. This was demonstrated when the original full-length IronWire was launched last year, and now the team is bringing a new small, ultra-portable version to Kickstarter, with a variety of connection options: USB to Lightning, USB-C to Lightning, USB-C to USB, and USB to MicroUSB. The price of £10 feels a tad steep, but for a cable that can take such a beating that it's likely to last forever it's not a big deal.

This one isn't a cable, but a cable accessory. In truth, it's more focused on traditional power cords than mobile device chargers: it's a solution for that age-old problem of too many plugs. Most of us have come to terms with there being an unnavigable tangle in between our desks and the wall, but it'd be nice if (at least) the plugs on the far end of that tangle were identifiable. That's what The Sticker Project aims to provide: a nice and simple pre-fab solution for labelling all your plugs, with just enough design flair to make them more appealing than scraps of masking tape.

from the wires-wires-everywhere dept

While wireless technologies are amazing, it still seems we're stuck with plenty of cables around all the time, from charging cables to headphones and more. Most people don't do much to organize them, or they go with the simplest route. Personally, I've been using twist ties to keep cables organized on my desk and it seems to do the job. I know there are a bunch of cable organizer products on the market already, but apparently a bunch of new ones have recently launched crowdfunding campaigns, so let's take a look, for this week's awesome stuff post.

First up, we've got the QooQi, which is a simple device for your desk to organize cables. You have to watch the video to understand how it works, but it's a very simple and intuitive way of organizing your cables and keeping them in order. It has a nano pad on the bottom to help it stick to flat surfaces easily.

The project is already just slightly over its $10,000 goal, and has more than three weeks to go, so chances are it will get at least double the goal.

Next up, we've got the Kordl, which is a very, very simple plastic device that connects to your headphones to keep them from getting tangled. It doesn't tie them up entirely, but rather just connects the two ends to each other, which prevents tangling. As they explain, they're using the "rubber band vs. spaghetti theory" in that single strands, such as spaghetti, get easily tangled and tied up, where as loops, like rubber bands, tend not to get as tangled (they haven't seen my rubber band drawer... ).

This one is also well past its target of $7,500, with about two more weeks to go. Personally, $5 for such a simple bit of plastic seemed a bit on the steep side, but I'm sure people sick of tangled ear bud cables might find it worth it to avoid the annoying process of untangling.

If the Kordl isn't really what you're looking for, there's an alternative, called Loop for organizing a variety of cables, including ear buds, but also power cables, USB cables and more. It's also a fairly simple concept, but executed nicely. Basically a simple attachment to the cable that makes it easy to wrap up our cables when you're done. My Thinkpad power cable comes with a similar velcro strip, and I always wondered why so few cables came with something similar, so the Loop looks like an easy way to retrofit other cables to do the same sort of thing.

This one has only raised about $1,000 out of $5,000 targeted, but there's still a month to go. Again, the pricing here seems slightly high -- $10 for two -- when it feels more like $10 should get you a pack of four or five of these things, but again perhaps I underestimate the demand and the production costs. One other oddity, it appears there's a nearly identical campaign to the Kickstarter campaign, except it's over at IndieGoGo, and it's raised no money at all, with just a week to go. It's not unheard of to see projects appear on both major crowdfunding platforms but it does seem like a relatively rare occurrence. Even more bizarre: the pricing is more expensive on IndieGoGo. No wonder it has no buyers while Kickstarter at least has a few.

from the joseph-heller's-coffin-clocked-at-over-7,200-rpm dept

Of all the spectacle surrounding the Wikileaks/Cablegate situation, nothing has proven to be more bizarre than the U.S. government's actions and policies concerning the continued classification of the leaked cables. One of its first efforts was its patented "escalating response", in which it first blocked off the Wikileaks site, followed by any site with the word Wikileaks in the title and, when this didn't seem to be burying its employees' heads in the sand quickly enough, it reached out to various security firms to see if they could build some sort of Wikileaks filtering system for its computers.

Things turned even more surreal when lawyers for Guantanamo detainees were not allowed to view leaked documents that had been published online by various news services. When is public information not truly "public?" Well, when it's "classified," of course. Had the principles not been currently fighting a legal battle in a U.S. court, they could have joined the rest of the U.S. (and the world) in reading and using these leaked documents.

In the business world, if a document is considered secret, it's commonly accepted that if it becomes public by other means, those with a contractual obligation not to discuss are now free from their obligations. This makes sense. Pretending that documents that are publicly available for all and which have been widely discussed in the press are not "public" doesn't make sense.

With a recently filed lawsuit against the State Department, the ACLU hopes to bring this legal catch-22 to its illogical conclusion and make publicly published documents officially public. Andy Greenberg (Forbes) explains the ACLU's rationale:

Given that all those memos have already been covered by the news media, why bother to declassify them anyway? "The point is to expose the legal fiction that the secrecy system rests on," says Ben Wizner, a staff attorney for the ACLU. "The government uses this formality of secrecy to avoid having to answer for real violations of the law."

Wizner says that keeping the documents classified makes them much more difficult to use in courts, for instance, and allows the government to avoid confirming their authenticity.

The files that WikiLeaks released on Guantanamo detainees in April, for example, can’t be used by the defense lawyers for those prisoners unless they’re viewed in a secure government facility. “Government employees can’t read the New York Times. When I go to court in a real lawsuit seeking to get compensation for a victim’s ordeal and hold people liable, I can’t use this information,” Wizner says.

This should prove to be an alternately infuriating and entertaining case. There's going to be a whole lot of circular reasoning in play, all of it under the pretense of protecting state secrets that everyone already knows. The sad part is that taxpayers will be footing the bill for the government's last-ditch attempt to close several barn doors, while warily keeping an eye on all the free-roaming horses.

from the trademark-fun dept

Monster Cable has a long history of abusing trademark law to threaten and/or sue pretty much any company that uses the name "Monster" in its brand. That has included the TV show Monster Garage, a clothing store called MonsterVintage, Disney for the movie Monsters, Inc., the makers of Monster Energy drink, the Chicago Bears for having the nickname "Monsters of the Midway," and the Boston Red Sox for offering "Monster seats" on top of their famous "Green Monster" wall. We recently noted that it had also gone after Monster Mini Golf.

Of course, that's not how trademark law works. It doesn't give Monster Cable total control over the name Monster. It just gives the company the right to prevent others from using the brand in the same market in a way that is likely to confuse consumers. It's difficult to believe that anyone would think that Monsters, Inc., was somehow from Monster Cable. But, on and on it goes -- though, it appears that Monster Cable's lawyers were finally convinced to drop one suit. An anonymous reader points us to the news that Monster Cable has withdrawn its trademark challenge against the makers of Monster Deer Block, a salt and mineral lick designed to attract wild deer. Apparently, some lawyers for the makers of Monster Deer Block persuaded Monster Cable's lawyers that there was little chance of consumer confusion between the product and the makers of expensive audio/video cabling.

from the show-me-the-infringement! dept

A few folks have been submitting the response letter sent by Blue Jean Cable's President to Monster Cable after Monster sent a threatening letter claiming that Blue Jean violated various Monster design patents and trademarks. While the response is a bit over the top, Blue Jean's Kurt Denke makes it clear that Monster's threat letter appears to be nothing more than a fishing expedition/bullying tactic and he won't take it. He responds to each claim, noting that Blue Jean doesn't appear to infringe at all, and asking for much greater detail in response, rather than simply being bullied into submission. Design patents are rather limited, but it looks like Monster is acting as if they're utility patents in an effort to scare off Blue Jean Cable, not expecting that the company's execs might understand the difference between the two.

from the details-please? dept

Last week we wrote about James Randi's challenge, offering $1 million to someone who could show that it was possible to hear the difference between $7250 speaker cables and $80 speaker cables. That set off a long discussion in our comments (and elsewhere) -- and eventually got the attention of at least one audiophile who has signed up to take the challenge. While it sounds like the details are still being worked out (in between the insults flying back and forth), assuming this actually moves forward, it should be fun to watch. In the meantime, about the only thing I'll note is that prior to this story, I don't think I ever would have considered $80 speaker cables "cheap," and yet, now I feel like my mental scale for such things has been reset. That's not necessarily a good thing.